The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
most many people with familial hypercholesterolemia also have concomitant hypercoagulability they are prone to clotting and I think he's show and I'll get him on the show I think he's shown that if you look at people with FH who have clotting hyper you know a tendency toward clotting versus people who don't have a tendency toward clotting you see a real difference in outcomes again suggesting it's not the LDL and most likely it could be something else
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
and they separated them out from the extreme FH who had an LDL around 400 plus and they looked at the difference in outcomes and there was really very little difference again even between LDL 200 nel DL 400 was almost no difference in the survival curves
and my own research we'd figured out that it was nothing to do with LDL in terms of the people with FH who develop heart disease versus the ones that don't have no difference in LDL it's probably something to do with those a subset of those people who have issues with clotting Etc